Originally posted by KneverKnightAssuming the police believed that, the question is whether such a belief was "reasonable" under all the circumstances. I hesitate to make a determination on the basis of facts reported so far; the eyewitness accounts are contradictory and the police have already changed their story on salient points(yesterday the guy was "directly linked to the investigation" of the bombings). Shooting five times in the head seems questionable, as does allowing him to ride a bus but then becoming convinced he was a suicide bombing at the subway station. But the matter is being investigated and hopefully a full report will be made public.
I think the coppers thought he had a bomb and stopped him from detonating it in the manner in which they were trained to do.
I can't say whether or not they had sufficient reason to believe he had a bomb because I wasn't there. I think they might have had a good reason considering recent events and the man's actions as reported in the press.
1 edit
Originally posted by no1marauderExactly; not enough reliable evidence to make a call yet, what convinced the coppers he was a threat remains to be seen.
Assuming the police believed that, the question is whether such a belief was "reasonable" under all the circumstances. I hesitate to make a determination on the basis of facts reported so far; the eyewitness accounts are cont ...[text shortened]... eing investigated and hopefully a full report will be made public.
As far as a head shot goes, it's the quickest way to stop somebody from pressing a button.
I might add that part of terror strategy is to rattle the cage hard so that fear and panic take hold, demoralize the target populace.
Seems to be working.
Time for beer and BBQ and "normal" stuff.
2 edits
Originally posted by KneverKnightSince when does police training involve subduing people and then shooting them in the head?
I think the coppers thought he had a bomb and stopped him from detonating it in the manner in which they were trained to do.
I can't say whether or not they had sufficient reason to believe he had a bomb because I wasn't there. I th ...[text shortened]... ing recent events and the man's actions as reported in the press.
Not only did he not have a bomb, but had he he would have detonated it at the first sign of trouble. What is most concerning is that this is a deliberate policy, not an individual policeman exceeding his orders. The policy of head shots means that they are more likely to miss if they have to shoot from a distance, if they have to get close to them then you already know that they don't have a bomb due to still being alive. The policy makes no sense. It's sole purpose is to intimidate and since dieing is not a suicide bombers greatest fear (being caught and made to live a long life in prison makes for more of a punishment if you think about it) the people being intimidated are not those that are guilty, but those that are innocent but fear being mistaken for a terrorist - ordinary law abiding people of Asian descent, or since this man was Brazilian and not Asian looking at all this includes the rest of us too.
This change in policy will be regarded as a victory by the likes of Bin Laden (assuming he's still alive) and will only encourage them to attempt new attacks in the hope of provoking even greater changes to our society. Changing what you do on a day to day basis is what the terrorists want. Taking away the things which cause people to want to become suicide bombers on the other hand will defeat them.
I know that you will think that this is contradictory, but life is like that:
Getting the Troops out of Iraq is bad for the terrorist leaders.
Giving the police ever greater powers is giving in to terrorists.
Originally posted by VargA very sensible post. People forget that the policeman on the street has a few seconds or less to decide the fate of one person or the masses. The law (and morality) will judge the outcome not on the facts in hind site but the facts as seen through the eyes of the policeman during those few seconds.
It seems that dfm is the only one talking sense in this thread. Most of the rest is knee-kerk, left-wing, bleeding heart softness.
The guy did speak English, so whoever said that was spouting shite.
This guy was being trailed, the police were following him but presumably didn't actually suspect him of having a bomb until he jumped the turnstiles and ran.
As ...[text shortened]... stances must be a very tough job, that few people commenting here seem to be able to understand.
The blame for the current tension is with the terrorist extremists anyone pointing at the police should put themselves behind the trigger for a few moments.
The English police are doing a great job!
You get my rec varg.
Originally posted by Tirau DanOther people seem to forget that an innocent man had a split second to decide what to do when presented with people in civilian clothes waving guns at him. Perhaps that ought to be considered too when you mindlessly support whatever actions police take (even before all the facts are in).
A very sensible post. People forget that the policeman on the street has a few seconds or less to decide the fate of one person or the masses. The law (and morality) will judge the outcome not on the facts in hind site but the facts as seen through the eyes of the policeman during those few seconds.
The blame for the current tension is with the terro ...[text shortened]... rigger for a few moments.
The English police are doing a great job!
You get my rec varg.
1 edit
Originally posted by Tirau DanI have to agree and disagrre (in part) with you.
A very sensible post. People forget that the policeman on the street has a few seconds or less to decide the fate of one person or the masses. The law (and morality) will judge the outcome not on the facts in hind site but the facts as ...[text shortened]...
The English police are doing a great job!
You get my rec varg.
- People forget that the policeman on the street has a few seconds or less to decide the fate of one person or the masses.
Yes, that's true (People forget etc...). But a policeman shoud be trained, at least in theory, to confront such situations, and resolve them in the least perjudicial way. Evaluation of a situation and its possible outcomes are part of the very basic training of law enforcement personnel.
- The blame for the current tension is with the terrorist extremists anyone pointing at the police should put themselves behind the trigger for a few moments.
As the doctrine goes, you as a police, could see a man in the street with a gun in his hand, and you aren't authorized to shoot him, unless the subject aim his gun to you (yes. to YOU; aiming his gun against a third person deserves a different procedure). You can prepare your own gun and aim him. You can shout: Freeze! Halt! or whatever.
But nothing more.
So it's why good judgement trainning is all important. It is a matter of seconds when you are playing with your own life, or the life of innocents...
Originally posted by no1marauderIndeed - and most people don't get training in handling situations like that. You can't expect everybody to win over their flight instinct in a split second because they remember that running is not the best option in this situation. You should be able to expect a more thought-out approach of a policeman, because they should have the necessary training, and if they are unable to control their instincts even with that training, they shouldn't be allowed to work as policemen, just like someone who faints when seeing blood shouldn't be a doctor.
Other people seem to forget that an innocent man had a split second to decide what to do when presented with people in civilian clothes waving guns at him. Perhaps that ought to be considered too when you mindlessly support whatever actions police take (even before all the facts are in).
Originally posted by DeepThoughtSince when does police training involve subduing people and then shooting them in the head?
Since when does police training involve subduing people and then shooting them in the head?
Not only did he not have a bomb, but had he he would have detonated it at the first sign of trouble. What is most concerning is that this is a deliberate policy, not an individual policeman exceeding his orders. The policy of head shots means that they are mo ...[text shortened]... ad for the terrorist leaders.
Giving the police ever greater powers is giving in to terrorists.
Since suicide bombers became operational.
, but had he he would have detonated it at the first sign of trouble.
How do you know this? More likely run and seek a better target.
What is most concerning is that this is a deliberate policy, not an individual policeman exceeding his orders. The policy of head shots means that they are more likely to miss if they have to shoot from a distance, if they have to get close to them then you already know that they don't have a bomb due to still being alive
You contradict the statement implied in your first sentence, answered earlier. The "deliberate policy" is to stop the terrorist from detonating his bomb. You can't see a bomb from up close worn under clothing. The terrorist doesn't throw his life away for nothing, he wants to inflict the maximum carnage. If that means he is cornered and has no better target than police, better they are close.
As far as causing the target population to feel threatened, divided on terms of race or whatever, intimidated and afraid, distrustful of their authorities and etc.; yes, this is one aim.
I know that you will think that this is contradictory
How? I'm not taking sides here; just trying to remain objective and call it as I see it.
I'm not going to get into whether or not the UK should withdraw from Iraq, other than to say that I'm happy that our PM at the time kept us out.
Originally posted by VargJust spit it out Varg: "Its much better to kill one brown person if there are 50 white lives at stake".
It seems that dfm is the only one talking sense in this thread. Most of the rest is knee-kerk, left-wing, bleeding heart softness.
The guy did speak English, so whoever said that was spouting shite.
This guy was being trailed, the police were following him but presumably didn't actually suspect him of having a bomb until he jumped the turnstiles and ran.
As ...[text shortened]... stances must be a very tough job, that few people commenting here seem to be able to understand.
D
Originally posted by DeepThoughtTrue enough, but electricians and gas technicians are rarely put in the postion where they have a few seconds, in a life or death situation, to decide which wire or pipe to connect. If they were perhaps they might make a mistake or two.
Having a difficult job is no excuse for getting it wrong and causing someones death. If an electrician or a plumber (gas) gets it wrong to the extent of causing a fire in which there are fatalities they are prosecuted for manslaughter due to negligence.